moral dilemmas and gender

8/2/2019 Moral Dilemmas and Gender

1/21

GENDER & SOCIETY /February 2002Gerson /MORAL DILEMMAS

1998 Sociologists for Women in Society Feminist Lecture

MORAL DILEMMAS, MORAL STRATEGIES,AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF GENDER

Lessons from Two Generationsof Work and Family Change

1

Kathleen Gerson

New York University

Modern societies have reconciled the dilemma between self-interest and caring for others by dividing

women and men into different moral categories. Women have been expected to seek personal develop-

ment by caring for others, while men care for others by sharing the rewards of their independent work

achievements. Changes in work andfamily lifehave undermined this frameworkbut have failedto offer

a clear avenue for creating new resolutions. Instead contradictory social changes have produced new

moral dilemmas.Women must nowseek economic self-sufficiencyeven as they continue to bear respon-

sibility forthe care of others. Mencan rejectthe obligationto provide forothers, but they face newpres-

sures to become more involved fathers and partners. Facing these dilemmas, young women and men

mustdevelop innovativemoral strategies to renegotiate work-family conflicts and transformtraditional

viewsof gender, but persisting institutional obstacles thwart their emergingaspirations to balance per-

sonal autonomy with caring for others. To overcome these obstacles, we need to create more humane,

lessgenderedtheoreticaland social frameworksfor understandingand apportioningmoral obligation.

Choosing between self-interest andcaringfor othersis oneof themost fundamen-tal dilemmas facing all of us. To reconcile this dilemma, modern societies in gen-

eraland American society in particularhave tried to divide women and men

into different moral categories. Since the rise of industrialism, the social organiza-

tion of moral responsibility has expected women to seek personal development by

caring for others and men to care for others by sharing the rewards of independent

achievement.

Although labeled traditional, this gendered divisionof moral labor represents

a social form and cultural mandate that rose to prominence in the mid-twentieth

century but reached an impasse as the postindustrial era opened new avenues for

work and family life. (Among the voluminous works on this subject, see Kimmel

1996; Ryan 1981; Welter 1966.) At the outset of the twenty-first century, women

8

REPRINT REQUESTS: Kathleen Gerson, Departmentof Sociology, New York University, 269 Mercer

Street, New York, NY 10003; e-mail: [email protected].

GENDER & SOCIETY, Vol. 16 No. 1, February 2002 8-28

2002 Sociologists for Women in Society


2/21

andmenface risingconflictsover how to resolve thebasic tensions between family

and work, public and private, autonomy and commitment. They are searching fornew strategies for reconciling an independent self with commitment to others.

Whilethe long-termtrajectory of change remains unclear, newsocial conditions

have severely undermined the link between gender and moral obligation. The

young women and men who havecome of age amid this changing social landscape

face risks and dangers, but they also inherit an unprecedented opportunity to forge

new, more egalitarian ways to balance self-development with commitment to oth-

ers. To enablethemtodoso,however,we must reshape work andfamily institutions

in ways that overcome beliefs and practices that presume gender differences in

moral responsibility.

Drawing on insights from my research on how contemporaryyoung women and

men negotiate the conflicts between family and work, I explore how new social

conditions are compelling them to reconsider traditional strategies for reconciling

self-development with caring for others. Social changehas undermined earlier res-

olutions to these dilemmas but does not offer clear avenues for creating new ones.

My research on thechildrenof thegender revolution suggests that young women

andmencannot rely on inflexible gendercategories to resolve theconflict between

autonomy andcare, but they areencountering socialandcultural obstacles to creat-

ing gender-neutral strategies for apportioning moral labor.

GENDER, SOCIAL THEORY, ANDTHE DIVISION OF MORAL LABOR

Across a wide range of traditions, social theorists remain concerned with the

tension between autonomy and commitment. From de Tocqueville to Bellah, cul-

tural theorists have spokenof a conflict between individualism and commitment in

American life (Bellah et al. 1985; de Tocqueville [1832] 1969). From Parsons on,

functionalist sociologists have distinguished between instrumental and expressive

functions.2 And economists, especially those who advocate human capital and

rational choice approaches, separate the public domain of the market from the pri-

vate sphere of the home (Becker 1981).

Despite their differences, all of these theoretical approaches rely on gender dif-

ference,either implicitly or explicitly, to reconcilethe theoretical andpracticalcon-

flicts between self-interest and social obligation. Psychological approaches, for

example, emphasize that early childhood socialization leads girls and boys to

develop contrasting orientations toward morality and care, self and others. Even

rational choice approaches, which argue that self-interested calculation underlies

allhumanaction, assumethat womenandmenpossess differenttastes andabilities,making it more efficient for women to specialize in domestic care and men to spe-

cialize in the world of paid work (for another critique, see England 1993).

Despite a vast amount of research demonstrating that the temperamental differ-

ences among women and among men are far greater than the differences between

Gerson / MORAL DILEMMAS 9


3/21

them, the appeal of a theoretical lens assuming a gender dichotomy in moral orien-

tation remains strong.3 It provides a way to resolve the universal human tensionbetween self-interest and self-sacrifice as well as the social tensions between the

marketplace and domestic work. Yet, it does so at a great cost. In its starkest terms,

this framework justifies gender inequality by cloaking socially constructed gender

categories with moral authority. It draws a sharp gender divide, suggesting that

women can be for themselves by being for others, while men can be for others by

being for themselves. Transgressing these boundaries continues to risk social dis-

approval or worse.4

Feminists have been understandably ambivalent about the moral

dichotomization of gender. Some have implicitly adopted the classical framework

while criticizing its underpinnings andconsequences. Those emphasizing psycho-

logical processeshavemost clearly restated theidea that womenandmen diverge in

their orientations toward self andothers, although they seewomens caringcapaci-

ties as a special strength and mark of virtue. Gilligan argues, for example, that

womens ethic of care should be as valued and esteemed as mens ethic of

rights (Gilligan 1982; Gilligan, Ward, and Taylor 1989). And Chodorows theory

of mothering contends that the unequal, asymmetrical social organization of

parenting causes women to seek connection and men to seek separation.5 Most of

those who emphasize womens distinct moral voice acknowledge that it is

sociallyconstructedandthat itdeserves tobeaccordedequal (orgreater)value.Yet,

they stop short of asking whether women and menas social groupsactually

possess different moral capacities and outlooks.

While it is important to assert that it is just as valuable to pursue emotional con-

nection and provide care as it is to create an independent self or provide economi-

cally for a family, it is also critical to question the premise that women and mencan

be separated into distinct, opposed, or unchanging moral categories. As Epstein

argues, any vision of dichotomous gender distinctions is not only inaccurate; it is

also an ideological construct that justifies and reinforces inequality. Connell points

out that masculinities and femininities vary across historical time and space.

Lorberand Risman, among others, question theconcept of genderitself,pointing to

the social paradoxes and cultural contradictions to which all human actors must

respond in constructing their public and private selves. These theorists recognize

that gender is a social institution, not an inherent trait, and that it shapes organiza-

tions and opportunity structures as well as personal experiences (Connell 1995,

1987; Epstein 1988; Lorber 1994; Risman 1998).

There are good analytic and empirical reasons to reject the use of gender to

resolve theknottymoral conflictsbetween publicand private,work andfamily, self

andother. It is difficult to avoid theconclusion that using genderin this wayis more

prescriptive than descriptive. Such approaches may depict how women and menshouldbehave, but they do not provide an accurate description or explanation of

how women and men actually do behave or how they wouldbehave if alternative

options were available. Certainly, theproportion who have conformed to gendered

injunctions about appropriate moral choices has varied substantially across

10 GENDER & SOCIETY / February 2002


4/21

societies, subcultures, andhistorical periods. Countlesswomen andmenhavebeen

labeled deviant for theirreluctanceor inabilitytouphold idealizedconceptions ofgender. A framework of gendered moralities helps justify inequalities and stigma-

tize those who do not conform.

THE INSTITUTIONAL ROOTSOF THE CURRENT IMPASSE

Assigning women and men to distinct, homogeneous moral groups may have

seemednatural, desirable, and inevitable when socialmajorities livedin, or aspired

to live in, malebreadwinner/female caretakerhouseholds, but thedemographicand

ideological underpinnings of this framework are eroding. At the outset of a new

century, new generations of young adultscannot rely on notions of gendered differ-

ences in moral capacities tomake viableor satisfying work andfamily choices. Yet,they face a setof contradictory institutional changes that makes it difficult to devise

new ways of responding to moral conflicts.

Changes in womens economic and social fortunes have both allowed them to

workand required themto seekself-sufficiency. Morediverseand fluid sexual part-

nerships have given women more choice about when or whether to marry and have

children, but theyhave also left women less able tocount on a malepartner for eco-

nomic support. The expansion of womens employment has offered them new

opportunities to seek personal and socialcommitments outside thehome, but it has

also intensified the devaluation of full-time domesticity.6 And the decline of the

male family wage has left even stably married women in need of independent

earnings. In short, a deeply rooted set of institutional transformations has given

women new options to pursuean independent life while eroding theopportunity to

confine their commitments to domestic care (Gerson 1985).

The fading of the male breadwinner household has altered mens options as

well, albeit in different ways.7 Men, like women, have more freedom to enter or

leave a relationship, making it easier to avoid long-termcommitment. Yet, they are

also less able to compel a female partner to stay in a relationship or to confine her-

self to the home. Men who find it difficult to support a household on their own are

less empowered to claim the privileges accorded a household head or to set the

terms under which wives and children will live. As a group, men thus now have

more opportunity to flee moral obligations to support women andchildren,but they

also face new pressures to become more involved in caring for others (Gerson

1993).

Women now claim the right and theneed to seek autonomy andpersonal gratifi-

cationbeyond caringcommitments,and menareno longerroutinely able or willingto provide care by supporting others economically. While these changes have

undermined established systems of gender difference, they have not provided a

clear avenue for creating a new balance between autonomy and connection. To the

contrary, a lack of change in other gendered arrangements has created new



5/21

structural and cultural contradictions. At the workplace, employers no longer rou-

tinely pay enough to support a partner at home, but they are, if anything, moredemanding of a workers time, asking parents to risk short- and long-run penalties

for the time they take to care for their families (Fuchs Epstein et al. 1999; Gerson

and Jacobs 2001; Jacobs and Gerson 2001; Raymon 2001). And although divorce

and out-of-wedlock childbearing have left more children dependent on their moth-

ers earnings, women continue to face constricted work and career opportunities

(Jacobs 1989, forthcoming; Reskin and Roos 1990; Williams 1995). These persis-

tent inequalities, which givepriority to paid work andto mens earnings,clash with

womens and mens changing options and constraints.

FROM MORAL DIFFERENCE TO MORAL DILEMMAS

The erosion of social supports for traditional conceptions of moral obligationhas prompted the search for new ways to balance family and work, but the contra-

dictory nature of this change has also produced enduring political debates and ris-

ing social dilemmas. Cultural conservatives decry the rise of nontraditional fami-

lies and the expansion of public opportunities for women, claiming that these

changes represent a decline of morality in America. Social progressives, in con-

trast, applaud the expansion of opportunity, personal choice, and tolerance for

diversitybutare concernedthat thespheres of family andwork arecolliding. Work-

places seem more demanding, local communities seem to be losing civic engage-

ment, and families seem starved for time and resources (Hochschild 1997; Jacobs

and Gerson forthcoming; Putnam 2000; Schor 1992). As it has become increas-

ingly difficult to carve out equal space for theunpaidcaringwork that women have

historically performed, women and men alike are facing apparently irreconcilable

choices between caring and self-sufficiency. The classic tension between individu-

alismandcommitmentnow assumes new forms andis beingexperiencedin intensi-

fied ways.

In a context where broad, multilayered social changes clash with continuing

inequalities, it is more fruitful to focus on moral dilemmas than on moral differ-

ences. A dilemma is a difficult, perplexing, or ambiguous choice between equally

undesirable (or desirable) alternatives, while moral involves a concern with the

rules of right conduct (Websters dictionary 1992). Of course, we experience many

moral dilemmas in deeply personal ways. They become social, however, when

institutional and cultural contexts make it difficult or impossible for individuals to

make a socially sanctioned choicewhen, for example, all options invite disap-

proval but action is nevertheless required.8

The current period poses many such situations. In forming adult relationships,how dowomenandmen weigh theneedanddesire forachieving autonomy with the

hope of establishingan enduring commitment? In caringfora new generation, how

do parents balance the need to spend time with their children and the need to earn

enough to support them? In crafting a personal identity, how do individuals choose



6/21

between attaining independence and building connections to others? These situa-

tions are dilemmas because they pose choices that have no institutionalized orunambiguously correct resolutions. They are social because they arise from the

way that social change structures available options and creates conflicts, ambigu-

ities, and inconsistencies. Theyaremoral because others judgeour choices, forcing

new generations either to change or to reproduce prevailing moral codes. Socially

structured moral dilemmas force us to move beyond habits and routines to develop

and justify new actions and beliefs.9

Studying the creation of, and strategic responses to, socially structured moral

dilemmas helps to illuminate the processes of gender change. It allows us to see

howthedefinitions andpracticesof gender unfold as individuals developresponses

to contradictory social options. Focusing on dilemmas allows us to view gender as

an incomplete institution.Gendered responses do not reflect inherent genderdif-

ferences but are instead strategies developed by differently situated social actors

coping with ambiguous circumstances. Change is possible in this framework but

never guaranteed. It becomes more likely when social arrangements create con-

flicts that require innovative responses. To expand on West and Zimmermans

(1987) notion of doing gender, such circumstances create conditions in which it

becomes possible to redo gender and, potentially, to undo gender, that is, to

either recreate or change thedaily experiences and practices of gender. Contempo-

rary young women andmen confront just such circumstances. Analyzingtheircop-

ing strategies provides a lens through which to view the contours of the future of

gender.

STUDYING GENDER CHANGE:FINDINGS FROM A NEW GENERATION

During the last several decades, I have studied two pivotal generations. My ear-

lier research examined how the women and men who came of age in the 1970s and

1980s helped forge changes in gender, work, and family life as they reacted to new

structural and cultural conditions (Gerson 1985, 1993). My current research

focuses on how the generation who grew up in these changing households and are

now entering adulthood are responding to a world where nontraditional family

forms predominate andgender inequality hasbeen seriouslyquestioned. In signifi-

cant ways, the older group can be viewed as the parents of the gender revolution

and the generation now coming of age as the children of the revolution (Gerson

2001). They have watched their parents cope with the erosion of the breadwinner-

homemaker ethos,andthey must now devise their ownstrategies in theface of con-

tinuing work and family change.To discover how new generations areexperiencing and responding to these vast

social changes, I have conducted in-depth, life history interviews with 120 young

women and men between the ages of 18 and 32. Theywererandomly selected from

a range of economic and social contexts, including inner-city, outer-city, and



7/21

suburban neighborhoods throughout the New York metropolitan area. They are

evenly divided between women and men, with an average age of 24, and are eco-nomically and racially diverse, with 54 percent non-Hispanic whites, 21 percent

African Americans, 18 percent Hispanics, and 8 percent Asians.

Most lived in families that underwent changes that cannot be captured in the

static categories of household types. That said, a large majority lived in some form

of nontraditional arrangement before reaching 18. About 40 percent lived in a sin-

gle-parent home at some point in their childhood, and 7 percent saw their parents

break up after they left home.10 About one-third grew up in homes where both par-

ents held full-time jobs of relatively equal importance, at least at some point during

their childhood.11 The remaining 27 percent described growing up in homes that

were generally traditional in the sense that mothers worked intermittently, second-

arily, or not at all, although most of these households underwent some form of

change as mothers went to work or marriages faced crises. As a whole, the group

experienced the full range of changes now emerging in family, work, and gender

arrangements.

The interviews reveal how growing up amid a shifting gender and family order

has prompted a new generation to rethink theage-old conflict between self-interest

and responsibility to others. Taking lessons from their parents and their parents

generation, but facing new quandaries of their own, these young women and men

are crafting moral strategies that challenge traditional views of gender. Their

emerging views on how to balance autonomy and commitment, to define care, and

to develop a personal identity amid ambiguous social shifts are presented below.

While these views suggest a blurring of gender boundaries, they also underscore

how persisting obstacles are creating a gap between young womens and mens

emerging egalitarian aspirations and their far more limited opportunities for

achieving them. Thenext section thus considershow pervasivebarriers toboth gen-

der equality and work-family integration arecreating a new gender divide between

women who seek personal independence and men who worry about losing tradi-

tional privileges.

NEW DILEMMAS, AMBIGUOUS STRATEGIES

How does this generation view its moral choices? As adult partnerships have

becomemore fluidandvoluntary, they aregrapplingwith how to form relationships

that balance commitment with autonomy and self-sufficiency. As their mothers

have become essential and often sole breadwinners for their households, they are

searching for new ways to define care that do not force them to choose between

spending time with their children and earning an income. And in the face of risingwork-family conflicts, they are looking for definitions of personal identity that do

not pit their own development against creating committed ties to others. As young

women and men wrestle with these dilemmas, they are questioning a division of



8/21

moralresponsibility thatposesa conflictbetween personal development and caring

for others.

Seeking Autonomy, Establishing Commitment

The decline of permanent marriage has raised new and perplexing questions

about how to weigh theneed anddesire forself-sufficiency against thehope of cre-

ating an enduring partnership. In wrestling with this quandary, young women and

men draw on lessons learned in their families and personal relationships. Yet, they

also recognize that past experiences and encounters can provide, at best, a partial

and uncertain blueprint for the future.

Few of thewomenandmenwhowere interviewedreacted ina rigidly moralistic

way to their parents choices. Among those whose parents chose to divorce (or

never marry), about 45 percent viewed the breakup as a prelude to growing diffi-

culty, but the other 55 percent supported the separation and felt relief in its after-math. Danisha, a 21-year-old African American, concluded that conflict would

have emerged had her parents stayed together:

I have personally met a lot of miserable children whose parents stayed together. Forme, it would have been worsebecause eventually, a lot of the civility they hadtoward each other would have broken down into hostility. They got out while it wasgood.

Andat26,Erica,who grew up ina whitemiddle-classsuburb,supported herpar-

ents decision to separate and received more support from each of them in its

aftermath:

I knew my parentswere going to getdivorced,because I could telltheywerentgettingalong.Theywere actingoutroles rather thanbeinginvolved.They werereallydriftingapart, so it was something perfectly natural to me. In the new situation, I spent morevaluabletime with my parents as individuals. So time with my father andmother wasmore meaningful to me and more productive.

Among those whose parents stayed together, almost 60 percent were pleased

with and, indeed, inspired by, their parentslifelong commitment, but about 40 per-

cent concluded that a breakup would have been better than the persistently

unhappy, conflict-ridden relationship they watched unfold. Amy, a 24-year-old

Asian American, explains:

I always felt my parents wouldhave divorced if they didnt havekids anddidnt feel itwas so morally wrong. They didnt really stick together because they were in love. I

know all couples go through fights and stuff, but growing up, it seemed like theyfought a lot, and each of them has made passing comments@151like Oh, I wouldhave divorced your mom by now or I would have left your dad a thousand times.(So) I wouldnt have broken down or been emotionally stressed if my parents



9/21

divorced. I didnt want to hear theshouting, and I didnt want to seemy mom cryany-

more.And I was also afraidof mydad,becausehe would never laya handon mymom,but hes scary. He could be violent.

Whether their parents stayed together or parted, most concluded that neither

steadfastcommitment norchoosing to leavehasmoral meaning in theabstract. The

value of enduring commitment depends on the quality of the relationship it

embodies.

When considering their own aspirations, almost everyone hopes to establish a

committed, lasting relationshipwith onepartner. Yet, they also hold high standards

forwhat a relationshipshould provide andanticipate risks insustaining such a com-

mitment. Across the divides of gender, race, and class, most agree that a satisfying

and worthwhile relationship should offer a balance between autonomy and sharing,

sacrifice and support. At 26, Michael, an African American who was raised by his

mother in a working-class suburb, is convinced that only economic independencecan provide a proper base for commitment with his girlfriend:

I dont want the fifties type ofmarriage,where I comehome with a briefcaseand shescooking. She doesnt have to cook. I just want her to have a career of her own. I wantthings tobe comfortable. Andsomewheredown the line, if I losemyjob or things startgoing crazy inthe marriage, I wantto beable toset mygoals, and she can dowhat shewants, because we both have this economic base andthe attitudeto do it.Thats whatmarriage is about.

Amy imagines a partnership that is equal and fluid, capable of adapting to cir-

cumstances without relinquishing equity:

I wanta fifty-fifty relationship,where we both have thepotential of doing everything.

Both of us working, and in dealing with kids, it would be a matter of who has moreflexibility with regard to their career. And if neither does, then one of us will have tosacrifice for one period, and the other for another.

Most acknowledge, however, that finding a lasting and satisfying relationship

represents an ideal that is hard to reach. If it proves unattainable, they agree that

being alone is better than remaining in an unhappy or destructive union. Building a

full life thus means developingthe self inmultipleways.At 29,Maria,whogrewup

in a close-knit Hispanic household where both parents worked, is careful to build

her life in many directions:

I want to be with somebody, to have this person to share your life withthat youretherefor asmuch as theyre there foryou.But I cantsettle. If I dont findit, then I can-

notlivein sorrow. Its notthe onlythingthats ultimately important. If I didnthave myfamily, ifI didnthave a career, if I didnt havefriends,or ifI didnt havethe things thatI enjoydoing,I wouldbe equallyunhappy. This is just one thing.Maybeit takesa littlebit more of the pie than some other thingsbut its still just a slice of the pie.



10/21

Across the range of personal family experiences, most also agree that children

suffer more from an unhappy home than from separatedparents.12 Miranda, whoseparents partedwhen her father returned to Mexico in her teens, looks back from the

vantage point of 27 and concludes,

For people to stay togther in spite of themselves, just for the child, theyre damagingthechild. Its almostlikea false assumption that you cando something for the sake ofthe child while youre being drained. Because the life is getting sucked out of you.How can you give life when its sucked out of you?

Women andmen both wonderif is itpossible toestablishrelationships that strike

a good balance between self-affirmation and commitment, providingand receiving

support. Having observed their parents andothers struggle with varying degrees of

success against the strictures of traditional gender categories, they are hopeful but

guarded about the possibilities for resolving the tension between autonomy andcommitment in their own lives.13 At 20, Chris, a Native American whose parents

shared work and caretaking, is thus beginning to wonder:

I thought you could have just a relationship, that love and being happy was alwaysneededin life, andIve learned that youve got to be able to draw that line. Its a diffi-cult thing, andyouvegot toknowhowto doit. Andthat wouldbe myfear. Wheream Icutting intomy jobtoomuch? Wheream I cuttingintothe relationship toomuch? Andhow doI divide it, and can it actually bedone at all? Can you blend these two parts ofyour world?

Care as Time, Care as Money

If the rise of fluid adult partnerships has heightened the strains between com-

mitment and autonomy, then the rise of employed mothers and the decline ofmale breadwinners have made the meaning of care ambiguous. Now that most

childrenwhether living in single-parent or two-parent householdsdepend on

theearningsof their mothers, parents face conflictsin balancingthe need toprovide

economic support with the need to devote time and attention.

Rigid notions of gendered caring do not fit well with most family experiences,

and the majority express support for parents who transgressed traditional gender

categories. Among those who grew up in two-earner households, four out of five

support such an arrangement,most with enthusiasm. Across race, class,andgender

groups, they believe that two incomes provided thefamily with increasedeconomic

resources, more flexibility against the buffeting of economic winds, and greater

financial security. For Serena, a 26-year-old African American, her parents two

jobs allowed her to avoid the privations of her friends and peers:

Both myparentsworked,anda lotof parentsin thisneighborhood,onestayedhomeorsome were onwelfare.So a lotof my peers thoughtwewere, like, upperclass because



11/21

both parents hadcarsandwe went to private schools.When I was in my late teens and

actuallyrealized where I fitinto thepicture,it mademe really appreciatemy parents.

And Jason, also 26 and white, finds inspiration in his upwardly mobile par-

ents example as hard workers who made things better for their children in the

process:

I would say (both parents working) made things better for the family because theirbeing so dedicated to providing, to working, they helped that ethic of having to workand not wasting time. So its instilled in me and my sister the ethic to work.

Of course, this means they see a mothers employment as largely beneficial.

Whether in a two-parent or single-parent home, womenandmenagree that an inde-

pendent base enhanced a mothers sense of self, contributed to greater parental

equality, and provided an uplifting model. Rachel, 24 and from a white, work-ing-class background, explains,

I dont think that I missed out on anything. I think it served as a more realistic model.Iveheard allthatstuff abouthowchildren need a parentat home,butI dontthink thathaving her stay home with me, particularly considering her temper, would have beenanything other than counterproductive. The reality is that Im going to have to work,and a lot of women in her generation chose not to work and did or didnt have theoption.She hada choice, andshedid what shewanted, andI thinkthats reallygreat.

Kevin, 25 and from a middle-class, white family, agrees:

For quite a while, my mom was the main breadwinner. She was the one who was thedriving force in earning money. My mothers persona was really hard working, andthats something Ive strived to be with and to emulate. I didnt think it was wrong inany way. I actually feel its a very positive thing.Whatever my relationships,I alwayswantand appreciate people whowork, andIm talking about female involvement. Itspart of whoI am,and itmakes mevery optimistic knowing that hard work canget yousomewhere.

They also deemed highly involved fathers, whether in two-earner or single-par-

ent households, as worthy examples. Daniel, now 23, describes his Irish fathers

atypical working hours and parental involvement:

Myfather was alwaysaround.Hes a fire fighter,so hehad a lot offreetime. Whenhewas home,he wasusuallycoaching me and my brother or cooking dinner or takinguswherever we wanted to go. He was the only cook up until me and my brother starteddoing it. So I want to make sure that, if I get married and have kids, Im there for mykids.

Incontrast, those whogrew up ina largely traditional householdexpressed more

ambivalence. Althoughhalf felt fortunateto havehada motherdevotedprimarily to



12/21

their care, the other half would have preferred for their mothers to pursue a more

independent life. At 21, Justin, who grew up in a white, largely middle-class sub-urb, looks back on his mothers domestic focus with a strongconviction that it took

its toll on the whole household:

Shewas very involved [and] always around. AndI appreciatedit, but I felt guilty thatmaybe I was taking too much. Its just that she wasnt happy. And she didnt give usany responsibilitiesat all. I guessthatmadeher feel goodto havesomeone rely onher.She felt needed more. And in the long run, obviously thats not something good.

And at 30, Sarah, also white and middle-class, agreed, pointing out that a

mothers sacrifice may evoke mixed feelings:

I wish my mom had worked so that she would have been happier. Her identity was

very much as a mother, and that was a sort of a void and pain. Because thats all shewas, andthatwas not enough.She would saythat it was, but thats not what I saw. Shejust seemedreally unhappy a lot of time. Shewas just overinvolved with us,and if wedidsomethingseparatefromher,thatwas a majorproblem. I wouldnt mind herbeingsupermom if that was really okay with her. But I got the message that she was givingup all of this other stuff to do it, and we should feel bad about it.

Breadwinning fathers may alsoelicit mixed reactions. Theireconomiccontribu-

tions are appreciated but not necessarily deemed sufficient. A good father, most

concluded, takes time andoffers emotional support as well. At 29, Nick, who grew

up in a white working-class neighborhood and remembers feeling frustrated by his

own fathers distance, is seeking joint custody of his own young daughter:

I have seen a lot of guys who have kids and have never changed a diaper, have never

done anything for this child. Dont call yourself daddy. Even when she was saying,Oh, she might not be yours, it didnt matter to me. This child is counting on me.

In this context, care becomes a slippery concept. Across family circumstances,

these young adults judge an ideal parentwhether mother or fatherto be one

who supports her or his children both economically and emotionally. At 21, Anto-

nio, whogrew up ina three-generationalHispanic householdandwhose father died

of alcoholism, has concluded that fathers should give their children the time and

emotional support typically expected of a mother:

[Anidealfather]is a strong, balancedman.Hes a daddy but hehasthe understandingofa mommy. Hecan care foryouand protect youandguide you. . . . Thats what I wantto do with my kids. I want to make sure that I have time. I dont want to leave them infront of a TV set all day, because what theyre learning is not coming from me. So Iwant to be there or, if not, I want to be in a position where I can take you with me.

If fathers should resemble traditional conceptions of mothers, then mothers

should resemble fathers when it comes to work outside the home. Gabriel, a white



13/21

25-year-old who was raised by his father after his parents divorced when he was in

grade school, explains,

In terms of splitting parentalstuff, it shouldbe even. Kids need a mother anda father.AndIm reallynot high on the womangiving upher job. I havenever wanted to haveawife who didnt make a salary. But not for the sake of leeching off of her, but so thatshe was independent.

And Miranda agrees that mothering means providing money as well as care:

My mother has completely and entirely dedicated herself to me in the true sense; shehas always been very selfless and very involved and fully responsible for me finan-cially. I wouldnt feel comfortable if I didnt think I could make that kind ofcommitment.

If such an ideal proves beyond reach, as manyexpect it will be, women and men

agree that families should apportion moral labor however best fits their circum-

stanceswhether or not this means conforming to classic notions of gender differ-

ence. Mothers can and often do demonstrate care through paid work and fathers

through involvement. Now 26 and raising a child on her own, Crystal, an African

American, rejects a natural basis for mothering:

I dont really believe in themother instinct. I dont believe thatsnatural.Somepeoplereally connect with their children, and some people just dont. I think it should bewhoever is really going to be able to be there for that child.

In theend, thematerialand emotionalsupport a child receives matters more than

the type of householdarrangement in which it is provided. Michelle, a 24-year-old

of Asian descent who watched her parents struggle in an unhappy marriage andthen separate after she and her brother left home, focuses on emotional support

rather than family composition:

As long as the child feels supported and loved, thats the most important thing.Whetherits a two-parent home, a single=parent home, themother is working,or any-thing, its just really important for the child to have a good strong foundation.

Identity through Love, Identity through Work

In a world where partnerships are fragile and domesticity is devalued, young

womenandmenareconfronting basicquestionsabout identityandself-interest.Do

they base their personal well-being and sense of self on public pursuits or private

attachments? What balance can or should be struck between them?In pondering their parents lives, most could find no simple way to define or

measure self-interest. While a minority uphold traditional gendered identities,

most do not find such resolutions viable. Women are especially likely to conclude

that it is perilous to look to the home as the sole source of satisfaction or survival.



14/21

Reflecting on the many examples of mothers and other women who languished at

home, whowere bereftwhen marriagesbrokeup,or whofound esteemin theworldof paid work, 9 out of 10 express the hope that their lives will include strong ties to

theworkplace andpublicpursuits. Sarah, now a psychologist with a long-term les-

bian partner who works constantly, has high hopes but also nagging worries:

I havea lot of conflicts nowwork versushome and all of thatstuff. But I would feelsuccessful if I had a life with a lot of balance and that Id made time for people whowere important tome and made a real commitmentto the peoplethatI care about. Andalso, to workI would be dedicated to work. And work and home would be con-nected. It wouldall be integrated, and it wouldbe an outgrowth of my general way ofbeing.

On the other side of the gender divide, manymen havealso become skeptical of

work-centereddefinitions of masculine identity. As traditional jobshave given way

to unpredictable shifts in work prospects, they are generally guarded about the

prospectof achieving stable workcareers.Having observedfathersandfriends who

found work eitherdissatisfying or toodemanding, two-thirds of themenconcluded

that, while important, work alone couldnotprovide their liveswith meaning. These

young men hope to balance paid work and personal attachments without having to

sacrifice the self for a job or paycheck. Traditional views persist, but they increas-

ingly compete with perspectives that define identity in more fluid ways. Widely

sharedby those whogrew up in differenttypesof families, these outlooks also tran-

scend class and race differences. They cast doubt on some postfeminist assertions

that a new traditionalism predominates among young women and men

(Crittenden 1999). When asked how he would like to divide caretaking and

breadwinning, Kevin considers the possibilities:

Whoevercan doit andwhoevers capableof doing it,butit should bedividedevenly. Iftheres something I cant do, just that I dont have the talent to do it, I would hope theother personwould beable to.And thesamegoes theother way. My parents were likethat. It was a matter of who was able to do what. There were hundreds of times whenmydad made ourlunches.And mysister claimsthathiswerebetter than mymoms.

Yet,beyond theapparent similarities,a gender divideemerges.With one-thirdof

menbut almost no womenpreferring traditional arrangements over all others,

women aremore likely to uphold flexibleviews of gender for themselves and their

partners. More important, women and men both distinguish between their ideals

and their chances of achieving them. If most hope to integrate family and work

andto find partners with whom toshare therewardsand burdens of bothfar fewer

believe they can achieve this lofty aspiration. It is difficult to imagine integrating

private with publicobligations when most workplaces continue to make it difficult

to balance family and job. And it is risky to build a life dependent on another adult

when relationships are unpredictable. In this context, both women and men

acknowledge that their actual options may fall substantially short of their ideals.



15/21

Forwomen, finding therightjob andthe rightpartner mayseem toomuch toexpect.

Maria laments,

Sometimes I ask myself if its unrealistic to want everything. I think a lot of peoplewould settle for something that is not what they wished, and, to me, that feels worse.Its a Catch 22, because you could wait so long, you never get anything, or you couldsettle for something and then be cut off from something else.

And men agree, although they are more likely to focus on the constraints of the

workplace, as Peter, 27 and white, implies: I want as even a split as possible. But

with my hours, I dont think it could be very even.

AN EMERGING GENDER DIVIDE: AUTONOMY AND

NEOTRADITIONALISM AS FALLBACK POSITIONS

The ideal of a balanced self continues to collide with an intransigent social

world. New generations must thus develop contingent strategies for less than ideal

circumstances. If egalitarian aspirations cannot be reached, what options remain?

Here, women and men tend to diverge. Indeed, even as they are developing similar

ideals, they are preparing for different outcomes. If an egalitarian commitment

proves unworkable, most men would prefer a form of modified traditionalism in

which they remain the primary if not sole family breadwinner and look to a partner

toprovide thelions shareofdomestic care.Women, incontrast,tendto look toward

autonomy as preferable to any form of traditionalism that would leave them and

their children economically dependent on someone else.

As young women and men consider the difficulties of building balanced, inte-

grated lives, they move from ideals to consider the fallback positions that wouldhelp them avert worst-case scenarios. Here, as we see below, the gender gap wid-

ens. Women, in hoping to avoid economic and social dependence, look toward

autonomy, while men, in hoping to retain some traditional privileges, look toward

modified forms of traditional arrangements. Yet, both groups hope to resolve these

conflicts as they construct their lives over time.

Women and Autonomy

Among the women, 9 out of 10 hope to share family and work in a committed,

mutually supportive, andegalitarian way. Yet,most areskeptical that they canfinda

partner or a work situation that will allow them to achieve this ideal. Integrating

caretaking with committed work remains an uphill struggle, and it seems risky to

count ona partner to sustain a sharedvision in thelong run. Even a modifiedversionof traditionalism appears fraught with danger, for it creates economic vulnerability

and constricted options in the event that a relationship sours or a partner decides to



16/21

leave. Four out of five women thus prefer autonomy to a traditional marriage, con-

cluding that going it alone is betterthan being trapped inan unhappy relationshiporbeing abandoned by an unreliable partner. Danisha explains,

Lets saythat my marriage doesnt work.I wont ever go into marriage believing that,but just in case, I want to establish myself, because I dont ever want to end up, like,What amI gonna do?I wantto beable todo what I haveto doandstill beokay. Youcant take a cavalier attitude that things will just work out. Thingswillwork out if youput some effort into making it work out.

Autonomy forwomenmeans,at itscore,economicself-sufficiency. A life that is

firmly rooted in the world of paid work provides the best safeguard against being

stuck in a destructive relationshipor being left without themeans to support a fam-

ily. Healthy relationships, they reason, arebased on a form of economic individual-

ism in which they do not place their economic fate in the hands of someone else.Rachel declares,

Imnot afraidof beingalone, but I am afraid of being with somebodys whosa jerk. Icanspend therestof my life alone, andas longas I havemy sisters andmy friends,Imokay. I wantto get married and havechildren,butIm not willing tojust doit. Ithas tobe under the right circumstances with the right person.

Men and Neotraditionalism

Young men express more ambivalence about thechoicebetween autonomy and

traditionalism. If a committed, egalitarian ideal proves out of reach, about 40 per-

cent would opt for independence, preferring to stress the autonomous self so long

associated with manhood andnow increasinglyaffirmed by women as well. Butsix

outof 10 menwould prefera modifiedtraditionalisminwhich twoearners need notmean complete equality. This split among menreflects themixof options they con-

front.Workremains central to constructinga masculineidentity, but it is difficult to

find work that offers either economic security or good opportunities for family

involvement. Without these supports, men are torn between avoiding family com-

mitments and trying to retain some central advantages provided by traditional

arrangements.

From mens perspective, opting for the autonomy conferred by remaining

unmarried, unattached, or childless relieves them of the economic burden of earn-

ing a family wage in an uncertain economy, but it also risks cutting them off from

close, committed, and lasting intimate connections. A neotraditional arrangement,

in contrast, offers the chance to create a family built around shared breadwinning

but less than equal caretaking. In this scenario, men may envision a dual-earner

arrangement but still expect their partner to place family first and weave work

around it. Josh, a white 27-year-old who was raised by his father after his mother

was diagnosed with severe mental illness, asserts,



17/21

All things being equal, it should be shared. It may sound sexist, but if somebodys

gonnabe the breadwinner, its goingto beme.Firstof all, I make a bettersalary. If shemade a much better salary, then I would stay home,but I always feel the need to work,even if its in the evenings or something. And I just think the child really needs themother more than the father at a young age.

Modified traditionalism provides a way for men to cope with economic uncer-

taintiesandwomensshiftingstatus without surrenderingsomevaluedprivileges. It

collides, however, with womens growing desire for equality and rising need for

economic self-sufficiency.

Resolving Moral Dilemmas over Time

In the absence of institutional supports, postponing ultimate decisions becomes

a key strategy for resolving the conflicts between commitment and self-develop-

ment.Forwomenas much asmen, thegeneral refrain is,Youcanttakecare ofoth-

ers if youdont take care of yourself. Michael wants to be certain hisgirlfriend has

created a base forherself at theworkplacebefore they marry, hopingto increase the

chances the marriage will succeed and to create a safety net if it fails:

There are a lot of problems when two people are not compatible socially, economi-cally. When Kimgets thesegoalsunder herbelt,and I havemy goals established, itllbe a great marriage. You have to nurture the kind of marriage you want. You have todraw it out before you can go into it.

For Jennifer, 19andwhite, autonomy also comes first. Commitment mayfollow,

but only when she knows there is an escape route if the relationship deteriorates:

I will have to have a job and some kind of stability before considering marriage. Toomany of my mothers friends wentfor thatlethimprovide everythingand theyrestuck in a relationship theyre not happy with because they cant provide for them-selves or the children they now have. The man is not providing for them the way theyneed,or hesjustnot a goodperson.Mostof themhavehusbands whomake a lot moremoney, or they dont even work at all, and theyre very unhappy, but they cant leave.So its either welfare or putting up with somebody elses crap.

Establishing an independent base becomes an essential step on the road to other

goals, and autonomy becomes a prerequisite for commitment. This developmental

view rejects the idea that individualism andcommitment are in conflict by defining

the search for independence as a necessary part of the process of becoming able to

carefor others. To dothat, women aswellas men tend tolookto work, and its prom-

ise of autonomy, to complete the self. For those with children as well as the child-

less, lifelong commitments can be established when you feel good enough about

yourself to create a good relationship. Shauna, a 30-year-old African American

who was raised by her mother and stepfather, explains,



18/21

If youre not happywith yourself, then youcant behappywith someone else. Imnot

looking forsomeone tofill a void.I thinkthats what a lot ofpeopledo when theylookfor relationships, and thats not what its about. It s about sharing yourself with theother person, andwhenyoure content and happywith whoyou are, then you cangivemore ofyourself tosomeoneelse, andthats the type ofperson thatI want tobe with.

These strategies aredeeply felt andintenselyprivate responsesto socialand per-

sonal conflicts that seem intractable. More fundamental solutions await the cre-

ation of systematic supports for balancing work and family and for providing

women and men with equal opportunities at the workplace and in the home. With-

out these supports, new generations must cope as best they can, remaining both

flexible and guarded. Andrew, a white 27-year-old, has concluded that rigid posi-

tions are not helpful in an unpredictable world:

I wouldlike tohavean equal relationship,but I dont havea setdefinitionfor what thatwould belike.I would be fineif bothof uswereworkingand weweredoingthe samething,butit woulddepend onwhatshe wants, too. If shethought,Well,at thispointinmylife, I dont wantto work, or if I feltthat way, thenit would befine for one personto do more work in some respects. But I would like it to be equaljust from what Iwas exposed to and what attracts me.

Anita, a 26-year-old Hispanic, agrees:

I dont wantto beon myownforthe restof mylife, but right now its fine, soI can fig-ure out who I am. I dont want to look back later and say I totally ignored my needs.Imrealizing that things areso impermanent,and my expectations canonlyget me sofar.

CONCLUSION: TOWARD A NEW MORAL ORDER?

Deeply rooted social and cultural changes have created new moral dilemmas

while undermining a traditional gendered division of moral labor. The widespread

and interconnected nature of these changes suggests that a fundamental, irrevers-

ible realignment is under way. Less clear is whether it will produce a more gen-

der-equal moral order or will, instead, create new forms of inequality. The

long-termimplications arenecessarily cloudy, but this ambiguityhas created some

new opportunities along with new risks.

While large-scale social forces are propelling change in a general direction, the

specific forms it takes will depend on how women and men respond, individually

andcollectively, to thedilemmastheyface. Thosewhohavecome of ageduring this

period are adopting a growing diversity of moral orientations that defies dichoto-

mous gender categories. Their experiences point to a growing desire for a social

order in which women and men alike are afforded the opportunity to integrate the

essential life tasks of achieving autonomy and caring for others.



19/21

Yet, persistent inequalities continue to pose dilemmas, especially for those who

aspire to integrate home and work in a balanced, egalitarian way. To understandthese processes, we need to focus on the social conditions that create such dilem-

masandcantransform, andpotentiallydissolve,the link between genderandmoral

responsibility. Of course, eradicating this link might only mean that women are

allowed to adopt the moral strategies once reserved for men. We also need to dis-

cover how to enable everyone, regardless of gender, class, or family situation, to

balance care of others with care of the self.

The possibilities have never been greater for creating humanistic, rather than

gendered, conceptions of moral obligation. New moral dilemmas have prompted

women and men to develop innovative strategies, but the long-term resolution of

these dilemmas depends on reorganizing our social institutions to foster gender

equalityanda betterbalancebetween familyand work. Freud once commentedthat

a healthy personis able toloveand towork. Achieving this visiondepends on cre-

ating a healthy society, where all citizens are able to combine love and work in the

ways they deem best.

NOTES

1.My deep thanksgo toSociologists forWomenin Society forhonoringme with the1998Feminist

Lectureshipand to thesociologydepartmentsand Womens Studies Programsat theUniversity ofGeor-

gia and the University of North Texas for their generous support and warm hospitality.

2. See, especially, Parsons and Bales (1955). In important ways, Parsonss focus on instrumental

and expressive functions parallels the psychoanalytic focus on the developmental processes of attach-

ment and separation, such as those presented by Bowlby (1969, 1973).

3. Kimmel (2000) presents an excellent summary of the evidence on the temperamental variability

within gender groups and the smaller and shrinking differences between them.

4.The concept ofvicarious identity, forexample, wasonceusedto arguethatwomencan meet theiridentity needs by taking pride in the achievements of their husbands and children.

5. Chodorow (1978, 1990) distinguished between womens permeable and mens imperme-

able ego boundaries, a distinction that parallels the analysis of Parsons and Bales (1955), which relies

on notions of expressive and instrumental functionsand predispositions to explain whywomenare

more involved in, and responsible for, family caretaking.

6. The transformation fromwelfare to workfareas a frameworkfor providing support forpoor, sin-

gle mothers provides an example of this process. Another is the rise of mommy wars, in which both

full-time and employed mothers feel compelled to defend their respective choices by contesting the

appropriateness of each others parenting strategies.

7. Even at its height, male breadwinning was largely confined to white, middle-class households.

Today, however, women, men, and children across all races and classes now live in circumstances that

depart significantly from this once predominant model. Current trends show that two-thirds of mothers

with preschool children areemployedoutsidethe home, 60percent of married couples havetwo earners

(while 77 percent of cohabiting couples have two earners), and 47 percent of the labor force is female.

Among children under 18 in 2000, 27 percent live with a single parent (22 percent live with a singlemother, and 5 percent with a single father), and one in three births is to an unmarried mother (Lewin

2001).



20/21

8. A vivid example of a damned if you do and damned if you dont situation can be found in

Hayss (1996) analysis of the cultural contradictions of motherhood, in which womenare expected topractice intensive mothering even as they seek a life outside the home.

9. InGiddenss (1979) language,theycausepeopleto move frompractical consciousnessto dis-

cursive consciousness. Behavior becomes action because it is has new social meaning.

10.Of this group,morethan 27percent livedlargelywitha single parent, including7 percent whose

parents shared joint custody and 5 percent who lived with single, custodial fathers. The rest saw one or

both of their parents remarry and form a new, two-parent household.

11. A larger proportion of households were dual-earning, but they varied in the degree of equality

between parents jobs and did not necessarily include both biological parents.

12. Amato and Booth (1997) confirmed this viewpoint. Respondents also argue that both parents

should sustain strong ties to their children whether or not they remain together.

13. Cancian (1987) provided an in-depth analysis of innovative attempts among couples to create

interdependent relationships, in which both women and men are responsible for love.

REFERENCES

Amato, Paul, and Alan Booth. 1997. A generation at risk: Growing up in an era of family upheaval .

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Becker, Gary. 1981. A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bellah, Robert N., Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Ann Swidler, and Steven M. Tipton. 1985.

Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley and Los Angeles:

University of California Press.

Bowlby, John. 1969. Attachment. Vol. 1 ofAttachment and loss. New York: Basic Books.

. 1973. Separation:Anxietyand anger. Vol.2 ofAttachmentand loss. NewYork:Basic Books.

Cancian, Francesca M. 1987. Love in America: Gender and self-development. Cambridge, UK, and

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Chodorow, Nancy. 1978. The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender.

Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

. 1990. Feminism and psychoanalytic theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Connell, R. W. 1987. Gender and power. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.. 1995. Masculinities. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Crittenden, Danielle. 1999. What our mothers didnt tell us: Why happiness eludes the modern woman.

New York: Simon & Schuster.

de Tocqueville, Alexis. [1832] 1969. Democracy in America. Reprint, New York: Anchor Books.

England, Paula. 1993. The separative self: Androcentric bias in neoclassical assumptions. In Beyond

economic man: Feminist theory and economics, edited by Marianne A. Ferber and Julie A. Nelson.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Epstein,CynthiaF.1988.Deceptive distinctions: Sex,genderand thesocialorder. NewHaven,CT: Yale

University Press.

FuchsEpstein, Cynthia,Carol Seron, BonnieOglensky, andRobert Saute. 1999. Thepart-timeparadox:

Time norms and professional lives. New York: Routledge.

Gerson,Kathleen.1985.Hard choices:How women decide about work,career, andmotherhood. Berke-

ley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

. 1993. No mans land: Mens changing commitments to family and work. New York: Basic

Books.. 2001. Childrenof thegender revolution:Some theoretical questionsand findings fromthe field.

In Restructuring work and the life course, edited by Victor W. Marshall, Walter R. Heinz, Helga

Krueger, and Anil Verma. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.



21/21

Gerson, Kathleen, and Jerry A. Jacobs. 2001. Changing the structure and cultureof work: Work-family

conflict, work flexibility, and gender equity in the modern workplace. In Working families: Thetransformation of the American home, edited by Rosanna Hertz and Nancy Marshall. Berkeley and

Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Giddens, Anthony. 1979. Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in

social analysis. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Gilligan, Carol. 1982.Ina different voice:Psychologicaltheory andwomens development. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Gilligan, Carol, Janie V. Ward, and Jill M. Taylor. 1989. Mapping the moral terrain: A contribution of

womens thinking to psychological theory and education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Hays,Sharon.1996.Theculturalcontradictionsof motherhood. NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversity Press.

Hochschild, Arlie R. 1997. The time bind: When work becomes home and home becomes work. New

York: Metropolitan Books.

Jacobs,JerryA. 1989.Revolvingdoors: Sex segregation and womenscareers. Palo Alto, CA:Stanford

University Press.

. Forthcoming. The future of occupational sex segregation. Contexts 1 (1).

Jacobs, Jerry A., and Kathleen Gerson. 2001. Overworked individuals or overworked families?

Explaining trends in work, leisure, and family time. Work and Occupations 28 (1): 40-63.

. Forthcoming. The time divide: Work, family, and social policy in a hurried era. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Kimmel, Michael. 1996. Manhood in America: A cultural history. New York: Free Press.

. 2000. The gendered society. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lewin, Tamar. 2001. Childrens well-being improves, report says. New York Times, July 19.

Lorber, Judith. 1994. Paradoxes of gender. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Parsons,Talcott, and Robert F. Bales. 1955. Family, socialization, and interactionprocess. Glencoe, IL:

Free Press.

Raymon,Paula M.2001.Beyond thebottom line:The search fordignityat work. NewYork:St. Martins.

Reskin, Barbara F., and Patricia A. Roos. 1990. Job queues, gender queues: Explaining womens

inroads into male occupations. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Risman, Barbara J. 1998. Gender vertigo: American families in transition. New Haven, CT: Yale Uni-

versity Press.

Ryan, Mary. 1981. Cradle of the middle class. New York and Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Putnam, Robert. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York:

Simon & Schuster.

Schor, Juliet. 1992. The overworked American: The unexpected decline of leisure . New York: Basic

Books.

Websters dictionary of the English language. 1992. Chicago: J. G. Ferguson.

Welter, Barbara. 1966. The cult of true womanhood: 1820-1860. American Quarterly 18 (summer):

151-74.

West, Candace, and Don H. Zimmerman. 1987. Doing gender. Gender & Society 1:125-51.

Williams, Christine L. 1995. Its still a mans world: Men who do womens work. Berkeley and Los

Angeles: University of California Press.

Kathleen Gersonis a professor (ancurrently chair)of sociology at NewYork Universityand theauthor ofHard Choices: How Women Decide about Work, Career, and Motherhood andNo

Mans Land:Mens ChangingCommitments to Family and Work. She is working ontwo books,

The Time Divide: Work, Family, and Social Policy in a Hurried Age, with Jerry Jacobs, and

Children of the Gender Revolution: Growing up in a Era of Work and Family Change .


moral dilemmas and gender

Documents